BACON

v.

STEAMER POCONOKET

Citator

Cited By

• W. Elec. Co., Inc. v. Hammond, 135 F.2d 283 (1st Cir. 1943)
  …us or equipment which the United States had purchased from Western Electric prior to the institution of the present declaratory judgment suit. Carroll v. Goldschmidt, 2 Cir., 1897, 83 F. 508, 509, certiorari denied, 1898, 169 U.S. 735, 18 S.Ct. 940, 42 L.Ed. 1214. But what is perhaps more important, from Hammond’s point of view, is that a declaratory judgment in his favor in the present action would be res judicata against the United States in any future suit brought by Hammond based on alleged infringing us…
• Thompson v. Smith, 103 F.2d 936 (D.C. Cir. 1939)
  …isposition made by him of his property.’ ” [53 App.D.C. at pages 260, 261, 289 F. at pages 918, 919] That portion of the language of the court above set forth as adopted from the case of Barbour v. Moore, 1894, 4 App.D.C. 535, 547, appeal dismissed 18 S.Ct. 939, 42 L.Ed. 1211, was used by the trial court in the instant case in caveatee’s Prayer No. 4, and the charge in the instant case, exclusive of' caveatee’s Prayer No. 5, correctly set forth the - law. But we think that caveatee’s Prayer No. 5 given by…
• Cuno Eng'g Corp. v. Hudson Auto Supply Co., 49 F.2d 654 (2d Cir. 1931)
  …t a rehearing that it should be similarly treated as regards the right” to appeal from a denial of it. The Circuit Court of Appeals [*656] o£ the Fourth Circuit thus ruled in Baker v. Walter Baker & Co., 83 F. 3, 5 (certiorari denied, 168 U. S. 712, 18 S. Ct. 939, 42 L. Ed. 1214), where the facts were like the present. Judge Simonton there said: “Coupling the motion to dissolve the injunction with the petition for a rehearing of the ease was, in effect, a motion, to rehear the decree upon the issuance of th…